| babbageclunk | externalreality: around for standup? | 00:34 |
|---|---|---|
| externalreality | babbageclunk, I sorry was in the kitchen and totally lost track. | 00:53 |
| babbageclunk | externalreality: no worries, it was pretty low key. | 00:53 |
| babbageclunk | externalreality: did you make progress on your action change? | 00:54 |
| externalreality | babbageclunk, I was making track but @thumper gave me an idea that I hadn't thought of which makes the code a lot simpler. | 00:55 |
| externalreality | Let the uniter grab the machine lock and then when it finds out that it doesn't need the lock, it simply releases it. | 00:55 |
| externalreality | wtf didn't I think of that | 00:55 |
| externalreality | I was attempting to restructure the code so that the uniter had knowledge of whether or not it needed the machine lock earlier | 00:57 |
| externalreality | the former suggestion is indeed much easier and works well | 00:57 |
| babbageclunk | externalreality: oh, nice | 01:09 |
| babbageclunk | menn0, thumper: could someone take a look at this? https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7590 | 02:10 |
| babbageclunk | It's not the full fix for the sub-sub thing, but it fixes the part that I broke in the first change. | 02:11 |
| * babbageclunk goes for a run while it's nice and sunny. | 02:11 | |
| menn0 | babbageclunk: looking | 03:56 |
| babbageclunk | menn0: thanks! | 03:57 |
| blahdeblah | Quick Q: If I run "juju config myapp --file path/to/myconfig.yaml" and myconfig.yaml only contains values for 1 config option and myapp has 10, will it wipe out the other 9, or just ignore them and set the 1? | 04:07 |
| blahdeblah | The docs on this aren't clear | 04:07 |
| menn0 | blahdeblah: it just updates the configuration mentioned in the yaml file | 04:11 |
| menn0 | blahdeblah: the others are left alone | 04:11 |
| menn0 | I just tried it to be sure | 04:11 |
| blahdeblah | sweet - thanks menn0 | 04:11 |
| menn0 | babbageclunk: done | 04:27 |
| babbageclunk | menn0: cheers | 04:28 |
| babbageclunk | menn0: damn, I meant to have a discussion about whether we should be squashing commits before merging at the sprint. Do you know whether there's a consensus there? | 05:14 |
| menn0 | babbageclunk: I'm pretty sure there will be widespread disagreement | 05:35 |
| babbageclunk | :( | 05:35 |
| menn0 | babbageclunk: FWIW, I prefer a small number of logic commits per PR (something like 1 to 5), where each has a proper commit message | 05:39 |
| menn0 | logical | 05:39 |
| menn0 | I tend to do some squashing and commit message rewording before proposing a PR | 05:39 |
| menn0 | my pet hate is seeing stupid commit messages that just say "now works" or "addressed review comments". it really sucks when you run into them while trying to diagnose an issue. | 05:40 |
| babbageclunk | menn0: I tend not to do the squashing until after review - otherwise you sometimes get someone saying "actually, could you split that one change out into a separate PR" and find that you've already squashed it. | 05:42 |
| === frankban|afk is now known as frankban | ||
| mup | Bug #1702236 opened: Juju 1.25.10 is running hooks prior to additional network interfaces being up <canonical-bootstack> <juju-core:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1702236> | 07:41 |
| === salmankhan1 is now known as salmankhan | ||
| === salmankhan1 is now known as salmankhan | ||
| === frankban is now known as frankban|afk | ||
| babbageclunk | Morning everyone! | 21:35 |
| thumper | morning] | 22:05 |
| babbageclunk | menn0, thumper: I felt bad about skipping a flaky test so I fixed another one: https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/7596 | 23:49 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!